Binod Ku.Choudhury v. State

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No.23823 of 2014 (Through hybrid mode) Binod Ku. Choudhury ....

Petitioner Mr. A. K. Dash, Advocate -versusState and others ....

Opposite Parties Mr. S. K. Sahoo, Advocate for the Insurance Company CORAM: JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA

ORDER

11.10.2022 I.A. No.11629 of 2022 11.

1.

Mr. Dash, learned advocate appears on behalf of applicant, who Order No.

was petitioner in the writ petition, since disposed of by order dated 21st July, 2022. He submits, prayer in the application is for enforcing compliance of directions made in said order. Mr. Sahoo, learned advocate, appears on behalf of the insurance company and prays for adjournment. On query from Court Mr. Dash submits, he does not have information of appeal preferred against said order dated 21st July, 2022.

2.

Clear directions were made in said order dated 21st July, 2022 on reasons given therein. The allegation is that State has not complied.

// 2 // This Bench on having dealt with the writ petition, is functus officio in respect of adjudication thereof. Applicant must find equitable mode of execution, for enforcing the directions.

3.

With above observation the application is disposed of. This will however not prevent applicant from seeking such remedy as may be available in law.

(Arindam Sinha) Judge Prasant